A variety of container carrying arrangements have been proposed and used for assemblies of two, six, eight and other numbers of containers and bottles. They popularly include baskets, sleeves and wraps of paperboard or carriers of paperboard or plastic which support the upper container portions. While such packaging materials are widely used, they have drawbacks of economy, manufacture and use.
With respect to paperboard baskets, sleeves and wraps, cost penalties are imposed by the large surfaces required to suitably envelop the containers and the heavy duty paperboard which is required to suitably withstand the lifting and carrying stresses. The requirements for strength under wet or humid conditions are poorly met even with more expensive paperboard constructions. Gripping features are provided by slots or holes, making for an uncomfortable and sometimes insecure grip, especially with large size, heavy containers. Also, disassembly of the package calls for the task of ripping the paperboard apart, often creating a highly visible litter problem. Such paperboard baskets, sleeves and wraps have the advantage of providing large surfaces for advertising or promotional display, but the fact that this is accomplished on heavier duty paperboard than needed for simple display purposes is not cost effective.
With respect to paperboard carriers which support the upper container portions, gripping discomfort, wet-strength and disassembly drawbacks are the same as for baskets, sleeves and wraps, while costs are somewhat improved, but with less display surface.
With respect to plastic carriers which support the upper container portions, those which are cut out and folded up from sheet stock, such as those taught by U.S. Pat. No. 4,218,086, are improved in wet-strength over the comparable paperboard carrier, but share the poor gripping comfort and disassembly drawbacks, while typically costing more.
With respect to plastic carriers which support the upper container portions and which are cut from flexible plastic sheet stock, such as low density polyethylene, similar to those taught by U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,711,145, 3,733,100 and 3,874,502, costs are low, but their usefulness is limited generally to small cans, and are less feasible for bottles, particularly large size bottles. Such carriers cut from semi-rigid plastic sheet stock, such as high density polyethylene, may be suitable for some bottles, but not large heavy ones and they are relatively expensive.
With respect to plastic carriers which are injection-molded to provide configurations suitable to support and interlock with the upper container portions, such as those taught by U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,159,841 and 2,996,329, costs are high, and for larger, heavier containers, gripping comfort and detachment ease are poor.